From: "Dan Maas" <dmaas@dcine.com>
To: "Mark Frazer" <mark@somanetworks.com>
Cc: <pavel@md5.ca>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: kernel changes
Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2001 03:29:15 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <07f901c148b8$720a6230$1a01a8c0@allyourbase> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <fa.b97kd6v.8j2vhi@ifi.uio.no> <fa.hmvo4bv.l2gsaj@ifi.uio.no>
> The answer is to treat all linus/ac/aa/... kernels as development
> kernels. Don't treat anything as stable until it's been through
> a real QA cycle.
I definitely have to second what you guys are saying here... 2.2.x is the
stable kernel series, 2.4.x is for caffeine-fueled developers who read the
LKML at least once every day...
e.g. I consider it extremely embarrassing that fundamental drivers like
aic7xxx, emu10k1, tulip, etc. are breaking regularly in the mainline
kernels. I haven't had any trouble with things like this in Windows for
several years now... Sure the Windows drivers are probably a few percent
slower, but as Nathan Myers once wrote, "It is meaningless to compare the
efficiency of a running system against one which might have done some
operations faster if it had not crashed."
I think we all owe major thanks to Alan Cox, who does his best to keep the
house in order amidst the chaos of kernel development (kudos to Mr. Cox for
holding on to Rik's VM design long enough for it to stabilize!). If anything
I wish there were a third primary maintainer who would take an even more
conservative stance, hanging maybe 2 minor versions behind Linus and -ac,
and only picking up changes that have been tested widely. Hmm, the people
working on distro kernels are probably just about doing this already...
Maybe if they could combine efforts somehow?
Regards,
Dan
next parent reply other threads:[~2001-09-29 7:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <fa.b97kd6v.8j2vhi@ifi.uio.no>
[not found] ` <fa.hmvo4bv.l2gsaj@ifi.uio.no>
2001-09-29 7:29 ` Dan Maas [this message]
2001-10-04 0:36 ` kernel changes bill davidsen
2001-10-04 9:43 ` John Alvord
2001-09-28 21:32 Pavel Zaitsev
2001-09-28 22:04 ` Mark Frazer
2001-09-28 22:31 ` Ben Greear
2001-09-28 22:33 ` Alan Cox
2001-10-01 9:07 ` Paul Larson
2001-09-28 22:06 ` Alan Cox
2001-09-29 13:43 ` Andrew Ebling
2001-09-29 7:25 ` Mika Liljeberg
2001-09-29 10:19 ` Ville Herva
2001-09-29 16:45 ` John Alvord
2001-09-29 17:23 ` arjan
2001-09-30 8:17 ` John Alvord
2001-10-01 17:07 ` Martin J. Bligh
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='07f901c148b8$720a6230$1a01a8c0@allyourbase' \
--to=dmaas@dcine.com \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark@somanetworks.com \
--cc=pavel@md5.ca \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox